the safeway is the only way.

• 21Feb 08

  Retroactive game of the years

  For no reason at all, I'm going to decide my Game of the Year for the last few years:

  2007: Shin Megami Tensei: Persona 3 (PS2)
  Runners up: Uncharted: Drakes Fortune (PS3), Rock Band (Xbox 360/PS3) God of War II (PS2)

  2006: Gears of War (Xbox 360)
  Runners up: Guitar Hero II (PS2), Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistance (PS2)

  2005: Dragon Quest VIII (PS2)
  Runners up: Okami (PS2), God of War (PS2), Resident Evil 4 (GC/PS2)

  2004: Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (PS2)
  Runners up: Tekken 5 (PS2), Katamari Damacy (PS2)

  so there you go, thats basically all the best games I've played the last 4 years.

  • Posted Feb 21, 2008 11:46 am PT
  • 0 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
• 3Feb 08

  2007: a year to be remembered.

  okay, so it was about 8 months ago that I gave my views on the state of gaming, so heres my updated look for how things have changed over that period.

  The Xbox 360 is still the Xbox 360

  90% or more of the games that do well on that system are still shooters, racing, and sports titles. Things are becoming a little more interesting, but it still seems as though its the console of choice for those who don't like thinking very hard. One could say Bioshock and Mass Effect were story driven at least, although you could run through Bioshock ignoring the story and just shooting things if you wanted, and with Mass Effect the story came at the cost of good gameplay. Blue Dragon was a disappointment, and though Eternal Sonata was not, it did lose its exclusivity.

  For online shooting games or a sweet game of Uno, the Xbox 360 is practically a must. The included microphone and easy networking features make it stand out above the competition in terms of ease and fun. I appreciate these things, but if I could only own one of the consoles, would I go for the one with the best multiplayer experience or the best single player experience? Goldeneye is surely one of my favorite games of all time, but it's surrounded by single player games that either had lengthy narration or dialogue and characters that I cared about. For as much as I love Gears of War, I don't remember the storyline beyond "aliens, run shoot them!"

  When I say that video games are art, a lot of people scoff. I understand their thinking though, I understand why they might not see it that way, and that is because of games like Madden and Call of Duty that offer fun and visceral experiences, but aren't about story telling or character development or plot so much. The truth is, the Xbox 360 provides a terrible argument for games as art because of its heavy concentration on mindless multiplayer fun instead.

  The PS3: Now with games I want to play!

  Sony has been improving since my state of gaming, which isn't a surprise since they couldn't have really gotten any worse, but with games like Uncharted and Ratchet & Clank Future out for it, there is a real, compelling argument to own the system beyond just future potential. The Playstation Network as well as been much more interesting, and in a way satisfying, than Xbox Live Arcade. Without a size cap on the games stuff like Warhawk and Tekken Dark Resurrection can get released on it and the original stuff seems to be a bit better too, such as Super Stardust HD and Everyday Shooter. clearly Playstation Network is not going for the arcade feel like Xbox Live Arcade, it is just a way to release smaller and less expensive games without the hassle of publishing an actual disc.

  The price point as well has improved, though at what cost is debateable. For me, backwards compatibility is necessary so I can upscale the PS2 games I'm still playing for my HDTV, and the ease of having an all-in-one Playstation system seems extremely appealing and convenient. This is not important to everybody, but the fact that they removed it needlessly should be a strike against them all by itself. It doesn't save them money to remove it, they just did it so people would have no choice but to buy PS3 games to play on it. To me, removing any useful feature from a console after it's been released is a step in the wrong direction and a mistake. Had their $400 model simply been the 20GB system with a 40GB hard drive swapped in, that would have been a much better choice, even sans the built in wifi; it's simply less confusing. regardless, being within $50 of the primary Xbox 360 model is a definite improvement, although I would sooner buy a 20GB system for around $300 from ebay myself.

  Once again, the future of the PS3 seems incredibly solid, but unless they can make their online even a shadow of the experience of the Xbox 360, they'll likely lose out on a lot of sales of multi-platform online games, meaning their strength has to lie with their exclusives. If Metal Gear Solid 4, Final Fantasy XIII/Versus XIII, Gran Turismo 5, Tekken 6, Killzone 2, Resistance 2, LittleBigPlanet, Disgaea 3, White Knight Chronicles and the other exclusives that may came out on PS3 this year can't shore up sales of the system, then it has no hope.

  Would Wii like to play?

  Sales say the Wii is most awesome thing since pop tarts and tang, but even if it is selling 40 million units a month (my estimate) it is a completely different market still. Mario, Metroid, Zelda, and No More Heroes proves that there will be real games on the system that are actually good, but the frequency of their release seems even slower than the PS3's lineup. The question on a lot of peoples minds is "is the Wii a system for real gamers?" and the answer is a rather indefinitive maybe. If you're still into Mario and pals and their exploits, then you'll have a good time for sure. If you want good third party games, well, odds are they're also on PS2. Quite simply, if the Wii is your only console for gaming, you're going to be missing a lot. With the other systems price drops, $250 seems a little steep as well for a second console that you'll only be playing a game on every 3 months.

  The Wii seems to have found its market, but it still completely baffles me, and I cant imagine that changing any time soon.

  • Posted Feb 3, 2008 8:41 pm PT
  • 0 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
• 3Jul 07

  The state of Gaming

  It has been a year since I wrote a blog entry, and much has happened. The PS3 and Wii both launched. The Xbox 360 has gained somewhat of a vocal loyal following. Portables have taken a backseat in the news to the new consoles, despite the DS' insane popularity in Japan that has analysts predicting 95% of Japan will own one within a few years.

  Well, here is what I think:

  The Xbox 360 hasn't earned its fanbase. It has some good games, but there is a real lack of variety among them. It has the best online features, but it is the only console charging you for them. It's cheaper than its main competetor, but has a huge failure rate. I have an Xbox 360, I bought it around Christmas, when everyone wouldn't shut up about Gears of War. I loved Gears of War. I played Gears of War for 6 months. Then I was done with Gears of War, and I looked around for what else there was. Lots of First Person Shooters, Racing Games and Sports titles filling the shelf, and very little else. I bought Tony Hawks Project 8 and enjoyed it, but it wasn't an Xbox 360 exclusive, so it couldn't justify my purchase. I bought Dead or Alive 4 having enjoyed Dead or Alive 2: Hardcore for the PS2 many years ago and found that the game had changed very little since then. I tried Oblivion, but I am a JRPG fan at heart and I couldn't stomach the western qualities of it. More recently I played Forza 2, and it was enjoyable for a while, but soon became repetitive and more of a chore than a fun game.

  People cheer on the fact that games that were once thought to be Playstation 3 exclusive are also going to Xbox 360, but that isn't much of a victory unless the original content on the Xbox 360 is great as well. Halo 3 is still Halo. Halo 1 and 2 were not enough to sell me an Xbox, so why would it be any different now. Nothing Rare has churned out even spurns my interest. PGR and Forza are simply not for me. The rest of the exclusives for Xbox 360 reads like what would have been a list of PC exclusives from the pre-Microsoft home console days, and as good as they may be, I was never into PC games. Those genres don't excite me.

  It's not all disappointment though. I am eagerly awaiting Blue Dragon and Eternal Sonata. I think the Xbox Live Arcade is a great way to spend a lot of money without realizing it. I like that I can get free episodes of TV shows now and then. Standardized online features like voice-chat and friends lists are practically essential to the future of gaming. There just doesn't seem to be a lot for me to play.

  The PS3 hasn't earned the disrespect it gets. I don't particularly like Resistence, or Motorstorm, or much else that has been released on the PS3 so far, and there are certain aspects of the system that fall short of the Xbox 360, but I cannot understand the hatred that some people harbor for Sony and the PS3 based on that. First of all, it is an expensive piece of hardware. This is common knowledge. The $200 price difference between it and the Xbox 360 is notable. The important thing to think about as gamers though is not "how can I save money up front" but rather "what will give me the best gaming experience."

  I do not own a PS3, but I have access to one, and with the current game selection I am not enamoured, and I don't think the public should be either. I am not short sighted in these matters though, and again, I don't think the public should be either. The PS3's future looks rather good from where I'm sitting. Sony's franchises alone are more appealing to me than Microsoft and Nintendo's combined: God of War, Wipeout, Ratchet and Clank, Twisted Metal, Ape Escape, Dark Cloud, Gran Turismo, Hot Shots Golf, Jak and Daxter, Syphon Filter, and etcetera are all franchises that I can enjoy that are virtually assured on every Playstation system. Combine that with new games like Heavenly Sword, Folklore and LittleBigPlanet, exclusives like Tekken 6, Final Fantasy XIII, Metal Gear Solid 4 and all the "lost exclusives" that are still coming out on the PS3 anyways like GTA IV, Devil May Cry 4, and Resident Evil 5 and I have quite a lot of gaming to look forward to. From that perspective, spending the extra $200 to buy this system seems like a worthwhile investment.

  The online feature set is inferior, this is also a known fact. There is no standard official PS3 headset, no common system that online games are built around, no real guarantees, but people often imply the worst when they say this. This is not the PS2 era anymore; the PS3 has wifi built-in for god's sake, it is made to be online. With some exceptions I can safely say were not going to see a trend of PS3 versions of multiplatform games not having an online set. Rainbow Six Vegas, Resistence, and Motorstorm are good examples of how there is a real online presence on the PS3. It is not better, it is not likely to ever become better, but it is still very real and very usable.

  The last aspect of the PS3 that I want to mention is its frequent firmware updates. Sony is listening to its customers and adding features that they're requesting. It is not like the PSP firmware updates where they are mostly to fix patches, they are real additions, new features, and it doesn't seem like Sony is planning on stopping any time soon. Sony may have made a few public relations nightmares, but talk is talk and action is action. Sony is getting stuff done.

  The Wii is to gaming what the arcade use to be. What the Wii does is not what other home consoles do, and I abhor the comparisons. People say that the Wii is much more fun than the other two consoles, but there is also a large segment saying that the fun wears off quickly due to shallow games. When I think about it though, it is doing exactly what an arcade does. An arcade does not have deep lengthy games, it has rhythm games, twitch games, fighting and racing games, and maybe a few side scrolling fighting games, but you're not meant to spend all night with any one of those machines, because odds are that wouldn't be fun for very long. I don't think with the Wii that Nintendo is trying to make deep lengthy console games anymore.

  Nintendo is a company built on those sort of games though, so why would they make a shift like this? well, its easy: the DS is their main console now. Their console and portable have switched places. All of the real content will be on the DS and the Wii will be for a more visceral, exciting, but ultimately more shallow gaming experience. That's not to say that every single game will fit into this categorization, I'm sure there will be some deep games on the Wii and some shallow games on the DS, but I think very much that this is Nintendo's real plan.

  Nintendo is doing incredibly well with their new philosophy as well. For me though, until they start making interesting new games and not just interesting new ways to play the same games, I'm not excited by any of their offerings.

  That's it.

  • Posted Jul 3, 2007 2:30 am PT
  • 0 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg

See Previous Blog Posts »